According to Article I, Section 2, Clause 17, the jurisdiction of the United States, (read federal government), is limited to an area not to exceed ten miles square.
The 14th Amendment states that people born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are "citizens" of the United States. So, only people living within the borders of the District of Columbia are subject to this jurisdiction. People born outside of the District of Columbia are not subject to this jurisdiction, unless they voluntarily choose to become "citizens" the United States.
Until the passage of the 14th Amendment there was no such thing as a citizen of the United States. Every white man was a citizen of the state where they were born. The federal government was to be the servant of both the states and the people.
At the point of a bayonet, the southern states reluctantly agreed to ratify the 14th amendment. With the ratification of that amendment those people born or living in the District of Columbia became 14th Amendment citizens. It does not apply to anyone else.
The citizens of the United States were subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government and their rights became privileges granted to them instead of having rights from God.
When we sign up for a social security card, a driver's license or register to vote, we affirm that we are "citizens of the United States". As "citizens" of the United States we are volunteering to be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.
Replies
"We volunteer to become citizens of the United States when our parents apply for a birth certificate, when we sign up for a social security card, when register to vote or obtain a driver's license we enter the jurisdiction of the corporate United States"
I do not agree with this, as it is not so stated. How and from what proof, do you extrapulate such opinion?
We were born sovereign citizens of a state and we were endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights including the right, to live, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The Constitution for the United States was created to protect the rights of the people and to be the servant of both the states and the people. After the Civil War the National government became the master and the states and the people fell under the jurisdiction of the central government.
The National government does not represent and serve the people. The government has climbed in bed with the Wall Street Bankers and Corporations. When a person applies for a Birth Certificate, Social Security Card, Driver's License or, Voter Registration Card, the applicant is required to identify themselves as a Citizen of the United States. All Citizens of the United States are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Can you explain with detail how the national govt became the master?
turn that last sentence around back to what it actually says " the jurisdiction of the United States are subject to the Citizens. Is this statement true ? What say ye ?
I concur, though any act that perverts it to begin with is null and void.
So, then by definition, they have taken over, are trying to take over, or plan to take over, our govt--A HIGH CRIME!
I am a BEing, see DOI & FTG;
How To Deal With A Bad Judge - Caught.net
How To Deal With A Bad Judge ... No Jurisdiction Sham ... Delay If Judge Is About To Be Rotated Off Of Case or Re-Focus Judge's Bias/Anger Against Other Side ...
study caught.net n I add when the robes use a rule to deny a right to a remedy s/he has violated their oath & committed treason & amounts to the 5th wrongful taking clause by claiming some rule Trumps ur 1st Amend Right of Petition
My next Class Act is to sue the STATE of ND for denying my Right of Liberty, my Right toBE left Alone, denied my Right of Petition with wanton discrimination & I am suing the robes & see how THEY get by ND Constn Art 1, Sec 21 & as loss of 1st Amend Rights construes irreparable injury;
Loss of First Amendment Freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury. Though First Amendment rights are not absolute, they may be curtailed only by interests of vital importance, the burden of proving which rests on their government. Elrod v. Burns, 96 S.Ct. 2673; 427 U.S. 347, (1976).
all my appeals don't get answered or the last was DENIED cause I don't "# paragraphs properly" also the robes have NO IMMUNITY for entering a conspiracy, see 42 USC 1985 then add Civil RICO 18 USC 1964 with 18 USC 241, 242
The Right toBE left Alone, see US vs Olmstead
I am trying to start an Apiary here & raise Specialty Crops that depend on Bees for pollination, like my own ecosystem cept the USDA is F'd-there is a grant with $33,000,000 available but there is no application form for 2017
SCOTUS has long held that pro se litigants do not have to follow rules for format, procedure, etc.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next